Special Edition of Sawdusttx
Set your clocks back: it is 1984!!!!! George Orwell lives!!! Doublespeak has arrived!!!!
7/18/2008: Tonight this was reported in a story on MSNBC.com:
"The two leaders agreed that improvements in security should allow for the negotiations "to include a general time horizon for meeting aspirational goals, such as the resumption of Iraqi security control in their cities and provinces and the further reduction of U.S. combat forces from Iraq," the White House said. "
The bold and italics are mine. This article attempts to make clear that these two leaders are trying to make clear (????) that a general time horizon is not a time schedule for a troop withdrawl. Got that? Well, I know what it is NOT, but just what in the world is it, exactly? And who, exactly do these two leaders think they are leading?
And would someone please tell me WHAT THE HELL an aspirational goal is? I thought aspirating was something you did into a mask in the hospital.
What few marbles were rolling around on the floor of the Executive Branch have been lost completely. I have said it before on this blog and I will say it again:
The government thinks we are stupid and we let them get away with it!
Friday, July 18, 2008
Monday, July 14, 2008
I wish I was at the Pool
Flip-Flops are For Kids
I do not remember when the term “flip-flop” started being used in general conversation, but I’m sure it was about the time the rubbery, sandal-type, thong thingies showed up as swimwear attributes.. I have no idea where the name came from, or who might have coined it, but presumably it came from the sound the soles make as you walk across poolside concrete: flip-flop, flip-flop. I know the phrase has also been used to describe the actions of a fish out of water, going flip-flop frantically, as it tries to get back into sea.
I have never owned a pair of flip-flops and never worn any. And I have never helped a fish back into the water, but the flip-flop metaphor is in use nearly everywhere the media covers politics today, and it is time for some usage correction and an apology. To be blunt, I’m sick of hearing and seeing it.
The term “flip-flop” has become an extremely derogatory one. After John Kerry’s campaign, it has been used widely to describe the way in which a politician seems to abruptly modified his or her position on an issue. This invariably brings about massive consternation from the politico’s former supporters on the previous position and a great hoopla generally ensues. Then matters usually get out of hand for few hours, until someone else makes an even bigger faux pas.
Over the weekend, I heard (of all people) Gov. Scharzenegger state (after blasting Bush on climate change: a flip-flop for a Republican) that if a politician, “after 20 or so years in a warm, comfortable place “ (or words to that effect) realizes that relevant conditions and factors have changed enough to warrant a reasonable change of mind, that is a “good thing” (or words to that effect). He went on to say that if the current presidential candidates find themselves facing that option, it is to their credit for having the resolve to modify their stance.
However, we should remember two things. First, politicians make this position-altering maneuver more frequently during campaigns than they do after being elected. Post-campaign changes are rare, but not unheard of. Don’t forget that George W. made any number of position promises (before he started signing signing statements) before the election, only to wind up immutably sticking with “stay the course” for almost eight years. He has done this despite raging public furor during much of the same time. Like myself, I guess George doesn’t own any flip-flops, either.
Secondly, politicians do not actually flip-flop. They simply slide, smoothly and craftily, but not entirely unnoticed, with linguistic fluidity, from the left to the right or the right to the left. Along the way they graze over and sometimes acknowledge the middle. But they do not go instantaneously from black to white. Although many of them would like to convince us they have the ability, they are not magicians. And despite their bluster and magnanimous claims, they are incapable of moving mountains. They may slide and slither, talk in vague metaphors and exaggerate, pontificate and try to reverse trends, but they do not flip-flop. They are not capable of anything so spectacular or complete. And let’s not forget, as politicians seem to most often, that usually a fish that flops too much on the beach soon dies of exhaustion and is eventually swept away by the tide.
We should abandon this phrase when talking politics. It is inaccurate. Flip-flop is a poolside noise, a cheap rubbery piece of footwear, the dying effort of a floundered fish. But politicians cannot do it as adroitly as is widely reported in the media. The frequent media use of flip-flop should be discontinued. And an apology is due to whoever invented the silly things for so horribly maligning their image in the public rhetoric. Flip-flops are for kids and for adults who wish they still were. Flip-flops are a cultural convenience: politicians are not.
Life goes on in Texas
P.S. After I wrote this, I realized that I should have mentioned that flip-flops can be bought at Wal-Mart and politicians can be had anywhere. And I think both are made in China.
I do not remember when the term “flip-flop” started being used in general conversation, but I’m sure it was about the time the rubbery, sandal-type, thong thingies showed up as swimwear attributes.. I have no idea where the name came from, or who might have coined it, but presumably it came from the sound the soles make as you walk across poolside concrete: flip-flop, flip-flop. I know the phrase has also been used to describe the actions of a fish out of water, going flip-flop frantically, as it tries to get back into sea.
I have never owned a pair of flip-flops and never worn any. And I have never helped a fish back into the water, but the flip-flop metaphor is in use nearly everywhere the media covers politics today, and it is time for some usage correction and an apology. To be blunt, I’m sick of hearing and seeing it.
The term “flip-flop” has become an extremely derogatory one. After John Kerry’s campaign, it has been used widely to describe the way in which a politician seems to abruptly modified his or her position on an issue. This invariably brings about massive consternation from the politico’s former supporters on the previous position and a great hoopla generally ensues. Then matters usually get out of hand for few hours, until someone else makes an even bigger faux pas.
Over the weekend, I heard (of all people) Gov. Scharzenegger state (after blasting Bush on climate change: a flip-flop for a Republican) that if a politician, “after 20 or so years in a warm, comfortable place “ (or words to that effect) realizes that relevant conditions and factors have changed enough to warrant a reasonable change of mind, that is a “good thing” (or words to that effect). He went on to say that if the current presidential candidates find themselves facing that option, it is to their credit for having the resolve to modify their stance.
However, we should remember two things. First, politicians make this position-altering maneuver more frequently during campaigns than they do after being elected. Post-campaign changes are rare, but not unheard of. Don’t forget that George W. made any number of position promises (before he started signing signing statements) before the election, only to wind up immutably sticking with “stay the course” for almost eight years. He has done this despite raging public furor during much of the same time. Like myself, I guess George doesn’t own any flip-flops, either.
Secondly, politicians do not actually flip-flop. They simply slide, smoothly and craftily, but not entirely unnoticed, with linguistic fluidity, from the left to the right or the right to the left. Along the way they graze over and sometimes acknowledge the middle. But they do not go instantaneously from black to white. Although many of them would like to convince us they have the ability, they are not magicians. And despite their bluster and magnanimous claims, they are incapable of moving mountains. They may slide and slither, talk in vague metaphors and exaggerate, pontificate and try to reverse trends, but they do not flip-flop. They are not capable of anything so spectacular or complete. And let’s not forget, as politicians seem to most often, that usually a fish that flops too much on the beach soon dies of exhaustion and is eventually swept away by the tide.
We should abandon this phrase when talking politics. It is inaccurate. Flip-flop is a poolside noise, a cheap rubbery piece of footwear, the dying effort of a floundered fish. But politicians cannot do it as adroitly as is widely reported in the media. The frequent media use of flip-flop should be discontinued. And an apology is due to whoever invented the silly things for so horribly maligning their image in the public rhetoric. Flip-flops are for kids and for adults who wish they still were. Flip-flops are a cultural convenience: politicians are not.
Life goes on in Texas
P.S. After I wrote this, I realized that I should have mentioned that flip-flops can be bought at Wal-Mart and politicians can be had anywhere. And I think both are made in China.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
